I didn't use Goldmine. I used Selecta7 (from the same people) and this turned out to be a costly error. The figures they published for selecta7 in their betting diary were correct and true. They did make £20k from £2k, but by the time i joined they managed to make £2k into £0k. They stopped publishing their betting diary about the time when they had a massive string of losers.
I haven't looked at their website for Goldline, so I can't pass judgement. I can only say that it may work and it may not. Yer pays yer money. I paid mine and lost the cost of the software and the cost of my initial pot - albeit with another product. Simply put, you have to be prepared to lose ALL of your money, on the expectation that you will win big. Its a gamble. You decide.
Marty Brown - MerseysideThere must be plenty of people with money to burn. £5k for a system that spits out entry and exit points, with no explanation, that are impossible to trade (For a start one would have to be following the Futures price to correlate with the SB companies price.)
I find it hard to believe that anyone would hand over £5k without first:
Checking the history of the company (Selecta 7? Hmmmm....),For £100 or so you could pick up a few books that would "teach a man to fish" so to speak. It would be money better spent.
I myself, trade the indices and in recent weeks have been extremely successful using a very simple system with bar charts and a couple of common indicators.
Anyone wanting to pay me £5k for the secret? :-)
Tiffanie Brooks - HertfordshireIf you look at their spreadsheet containing last four year's trading you see that despite the claims made about 'money management' there are many trades that have lost not just 5% (which they claim is the maximum risk level) but up to 20% of the account value - thus the dramatic drawdowns! There is nothing in the trading statistics that says that £2K to £71K in 3 years is based on real trading - they could have just fabricated all the data in hindsight! Also there is so little info given anywhere on history of company, number of staff, support staff, testimonials from satisfied clients, origin of software, relationship with Finspreads, money-back guarantee - which any reputable company would offer if it really had been able to generate those sort of profits for its clients. It sounds like a fly by night company which will take your money, run, and appear somewhere else!
Frederik Quinton - DevonThe reason why systems such as Goldline fail is because the core rules are faulty to start with. What most systems do (and they do it religiously) is to randomly hack away at a set of data until it turns into a winning system. This is much in the same way as a monkey smashing a piece of rock until he makes what resembles Michelangelo's David.
Can you see what the problem is here? The core rules are wrong.
What the monkey, err sorry, systems should do is to not go anywhere near the rock, err his data 
until he has planned out what it is he is trying to make.
Systems will succeed when the core rules are solid and where the core rules go against what the masses of traders believe and like.
Owen Worthington - Radnage, UKI am suspicious of this package, although having seen it in action am encouraged by its predictions; However the office I visited Stevenage only had 1 guy in it (the one i was speaking to), the phone did not ring and the office had a paper sign on the door - I was told they had just moved there. The intro was quite good and there wasn't a hard sell, the guy I saw said he would inform me of his trades for 1 month before I bought - In reality he gave me trend longs for about a week and then said they were too busy to continue fielding daily calls (the info given was useless).
Goldline are still advertising on ADVFN and they were honest enough to tell me the software only got 10 points during September 2003. I would have thought if this was loosing people lots of dosh, there would be a complaint to ADVFN about their claims and individuals would be warning people off all over the place - However there is just a silence, no comments either way.
Rebecca Summers - ForresI've read a lot over the last year regarding Goldline and kept quiet. I purchased the system 18 months ago. Why? because I was using their horse racing program and making a small profit (£100/month approx) and was offered it cheap. Like a lot of people I've always been interested in looking for the real get rich quick scheme, which doesn't exist. Shares seemed a logical step along the road, after all we all know stock traders make obscene profits!
So 18 months down the road I now know a lot more about trading than I did before. I can download historical data, draw charts, apply indicators and back-test systems. So what about Goldline, does it work, would I buy it now?
Yes it does work, it does return a profit over the longer term, their are periods of draw-down, but then doesn't every system. If you want a system that trades indices via spread betting which will make you a profit then Goldline is an option. It's automated, has excellent money management (the strength of the package for beginners), and via some back-testing of my own will generate a profit long term.
No, I would not personally buy it now. If you are prepared to work at learning how to trade, starting with the basics of charting and simple indicators you can soon devise systems which will show profits. So long as you stop looking for all the answers from other people and are prepared to do some work yourself. The other reason, is that I now understand money management, probably the most important and critical aspect of trading and yet the least talked about or understood. Having lost all the Goldline profit over the first year! I now trade both Goldline and my own trading system, and both are returning consistent profit.
So how does it work. Firstly, I have not reverse engineered the program, I have just recorded all the recommendations over a couple of months and worked out a system that gives approximately the same signals. I am not claiming it is the actual Goldline system, just a close approximation which via back testing generates a profit.
If you take one of the four indices (Dow, Nasdaq, Dax and Nikkie Not FTSE!) say the dow, and plot a 20 day moving average of the average daily value ((O+C+H+L)/4) and offset this by a measure to allow for the average volatility, you end up with three lines. My lines are the 20 day simple moving average of (O+H+L+C)/4, and upper line which is offset by adding 1.25* 50 day moving average of the range, and a lower line which is offset by the same amount. This gives a channel, which moves with the price when the market is going sideways, increases or decreases as the market becomes more or les volatile. When the market starts to trend, and it only needs a trending period of a week or so, the system will generate a buy or sell signal, when the price moves outside the outer bands. It is thus a trend following system.
Like most trend following systems, it gets you in late and out after the top (or bottom), but because the program uses trailing stops, will frequently generate a profit.
I have not worked out all the details of the stops used by the program yet, the initial stop is the middle line, after all, if the index moves by more than 125% of its recent volatility it is unlikely to retrace back the following day. This stop is held in place for a couple of days (it varies due to some unknown parameters) then the stop is moved to follow the direction of the market, it gradually moves from the centre line to the upper band, as in a trending market the bands will be lagging the market.
That is basically how it works. My version is to use the middle band as the stop, not moving it for 3 days, then moving it to follow the middle band until the index is visually above the upper band by a fair margin. Then I switch to the upper band which should lock in more profits but occasionally gets you out to early. The attached chart shows the bands along with the dow high and low for this year.
I'm not going to give more details than already provided, if you can't follow this then you need to study a bit more and maybe buy a couple of books. I recently read 'Technical Analysis for Dummies' again and was surprised how much extra was in their from my first reading! Secondly, I will reply but am currently working in the North and living in the South so am only home at weekends. Whilst I'm happy to use my PC at work to place trades and move stops, I can't spend long periods reading or answering posts, I save it for the weekend. Evenings without the family are great for reading and back-testing though!
Dave Marston - ThamesIt now seems that the oft discussed Selecta7 has finally died - or to use the term applied on their website 'sold out' - so now buy our Goldmine system. Hmmm. .
Hmmm indeed...
I wonder how many new revolutionary methods of selecting bets they have brewing. Run a hundred such methods for a while: the odds are that one of them will get lucky just by chance - lucky enough that statistical tests and common sense both say it can't be due to just plain luck. (It isn't - it's due to plain luck plus careful selection.) .
Hey presto! You've got a "system" you can market to the public, and it's backed up with an impeccable record of success. Pull in several thousand punters: you'll recover a lot more than the costs of running those hundred trial methods (remember that if they were halfway sensible, only a few of them will have been total wipeouts - most will have been slow declines, out of which you could recover a large fraction of your capital).
Keep promoting your scheme for as long as it remains reasonably lucky - or even moderately unlucky: you can always point out that it is gambling, and the occasional run of bad luck must be expected... Meanwhile, plough some of your profits back into running the next two hundred trial schemes. When the first "system" has finally and clearly run out of steam, or preferably when one of the second batch gets really lucky, shift over to promoting your new "system"... Note by the way that if you've run more trial schemes the second time, the odds are that the luckiest of the second batch is even luckier than the luckiest of the first batch - i.e. your new "system" has an even better record than the original one, giving you the perfect excuse for why you've abandoned the original one in its favour. And if I'm not mistaken, the claims being made for Goldmine are even more extreme than those that were made for Selecta7... .
Sorry, not trying to rub your nose in it - I just think it's worth understanding how the scheme is worked. And by the way, it's sometimes done quite openly. Look at any of the big fund companies who have launched a few dozen funds over the years. As a general rule, most of the funds will still be quite small, with a so-so record - and a few will be award-winners and have attracted a lot of money into them. Skill on the part of the fund manager? Or were they just the fund managers who happened to get lucky and call the market right? My guess is a mixture of the two: some fund managers may well be skillful - but the fund company can greatly increase its chances of getting a real blockbuster by launching quite a few funds. Both because they get a better chance that one of the managers is really skillful, and because they get better chances of a not-very-skillful manager hitting a superb run of luck, or of a moderately skillful manager getting a big boost from a moderate run of luck.
Ken Lovell - LondonNote that in some cases we have changed the names of the senders who sent us those reviews to protect their privacy.
Please note: this is my own personal opinion reflected here, and does not necessarily represent the view of the general public. All information posted on this article was culled from my own research and my own personal opinion, which anyone is entitled to disagree with.. bla..bla..bla..you know the stuff 
